• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Exit Through Intervening Dining Area

P

Phil B

SAWHORSE
Joined
Sep 15, 2018
Messages
227
Location
Florida
Opinions please on this:
One of the required exit paths in a restaurant passes from the circulation pathway through a dining area to the exterior. My questions are:
1. Does this violate section 1016,2 item 2?
2. Aside from being a trip hazard, does having to step up a few inches violate ADA requirements? There are plenty of seats where there is not step.
Thank you for your comments!
Exiting at Sloped Walkway.jpg
Exiting at Intervening.jpg
 
Phil B said:
Opinions please on this:
One of the required exit paths in a restaurant passes from the circulation pathway through a dining area to the exterior. My questions are:
1. Does this violate section 1016,2 item 2?
2. Aside from being a trip hazard, does having to step up a few inches violate ADA requirements? There are plenty of seats where there is not step.
Thank you for your comments!
Click to expand...
1. Doesn't seem like a violation since that's an eating area at a restaurant.
2. Yes, a step violates Section 303 of the accessibility code.
 
It might be OK if it's an existing restaurant:

ADASAD 206.2.5 Restaurants and Cafeterias.
"2. In alterations, an accessible route shall not be required to existing raised or sunken dining
areas, or to all parts of existing outdoor dining areas where the same services and decor are
provided in an accessible space usable by the public and not restricted to use by people with
disabilities."
 
Phil B said:
They believe it's OK to have a step because it's been done before.
Click to expand...
This is my favorite argument to dismantle.

the 2023 Florida accessibility code seems to point to 2003 IBC for accessible means of egress requirements. 2003 IBC Section 1007 states that if more than two means of egress are required, then you need at least two accessible means of egress for the area. Unless you're altering an existing building (see IBC 1007.1, exception 1, which may apply) or that exit is one of two required accessible means of egress in a new building, then the step is in violation with code as far as I see.
 
arwat23 said:
This is my favorite argument to dismantle.

the 2023 Florida accessibility code seems to point to 2003 IBC for accessible means of egress requirements. 2003 IBC Section 1007 states that if more than two means of egress are required, then you need at least two accessible means of egress for the area. Unless you're altering an existing building (see IBC 1007.1, exception 1, which may apply) or that exit is one of two required accessible means of egress in a new building, then the step is in violation with code as far as I see.
Click to expand...
I don't have a step in the exit path, so I'm good there.The exit path has a slight sloped section less than 4%. The slight step occurs on either side of that section of sloped walkway up to the seating area, maximum 6".
 
Phil B said:
Aside from being a trip hazard, does having to step up a few inches violate ADA requirements?
Click to expand...
If the change in elevation is not ramped per ADA 303.4 wouldn’t it have to be a minimum 4” so it meets the requirement of a stair per ADA 504.2? But then if it was a stair you’d need a flat (maximum 2% slope) landing per IBC 1011.7.1, so your 4% slope can’t serve as a landing. Then there would also be the requirement for a handrail you’d have to meet.

Phil B said:
I don't have a step in the exit path
Click to expand...
The seating areas, the step down to the 4% slope, and the 4% slope are all parts of the exit access (per IBC Chapter 2, “That portion of a means of egress system that leads from any occupied portion of a building or structure to an exit.”), any requirement for an accessible egress route needs to be provided from the exit access.
 
Phil B said:
I don't have a step in the exit path, so I'm good there.The exit path has a slight sloped section less than 4%. The slight step occurs on either side of that section of sloped walkway up to the seating area, maximum 6".
Click to expand...
I'm now a little confused. Don't you need to use the step to get to the required exit door?
 
Not sure if I am following...not all of the seating needs to be accessible........?
1109.2.9 Dining and Drinking Areas
In dining and drinking areas, all interior and exterior floor areas shall be accessible and be on an accessible route.
Exceptions:
  1. An accessible route between accessible levels and stories above or below is not required where permitted by Section 1104.4, Exception 1.
  2. An accessible route to dining and drinking areas in a mezzanine is not required, provided that the mezzanine contains less than 25 percent of the total combined area for dining and drinking and the same services, and decor are provided in the accessible area.
 
steveray said:
Not sure if I am following...not all of the seating needs to be accessible........?
1109.2.9 Dining and Drinking Areas
In dining and drinking areas, all interior and exterior floor areas shall be accessible and be on an accessible route.
Exceptions:
  1. An accessible route between accessible levels and stories above or below is not required where permitted by Section 1104.4, Exception 1.
  2. An accessible route to dining and drinking areas in a mezzanine is not required, provided that the mezzanine contains less than 25 percent of the total combined area for dining and drinking and the same services, and decor are provided in the accessible area.
Click to expand...
I was reading the plan to indicate that the seating area was part of the “main” level and not part of a mezzanine.

But what you’re saying does indicate that, in general, not all dining areas necessarily need to be accessible. I have been in one multi-story restaurant, it had two levels of dining and the third floor they used as a nightclub on the weekends. They provided elevator access to all floors, I don’t know if that was by choice or if the plan exceeded the 3000 s.f. area limitation in 1104.4 (“Multistory building and facilities”) Exception 1. Actually, now that i think about it, considering the dance area was only provided on the third floor they probably needed to provide an accessible route to that, maybe if that had been dining area they could have done without the elevator.
 
walker.t said:
I was reading the plan to indicate that the seating area was part of the “main” level and not part of a mezzanine.

But what you’re saying does indicate that, in general, not all dining areas necessarily need to be accessible. I have been in one multi-story restaurant, it had two levels of dining and the third floor they used as a nightclub on the weekends. They provided elevator access to all floors, I don’t know if that was by choice or if the plan exceeded the 3000 s.f. area limitation in 1104.4 (“Multistory building and facilities”) Exception 1. Actually, now that i think about it, considering the dance area was only provided on the third floor they probably needed to provide an accessible route to that, maybe if that had been dining area they could have done without the elevator.
Click to expand...
An entire story, I would lean towards access...a particular of handful of seats...no....The third floor may have a view that the first floor doesn't....


1109.2.1 Services​


If a service or facility is provided in an area that is not accessible, the same service or facility shall be provided on an accessible level and shall be accessible.


1109.2.9.1 Dining Surfaces​


Where dining surfaces for the consumption of food or drink are provided, at least 5 percent, but not less than one, of the dining surfaces for the seating and standing spaces shall be accessible and be distributed throughout the facility and located on a level accessed by an accessible route.
 
steveray said:
The third floor may have a view that the first floor doesn't....
Click to expand...
Without a doubt the third floor had a view the first floor didn’t have - and most would say a better view. The first floor by the entrance was the waiting area, no seating for dining. First floor dining area by the windows had a view of an exterior patio surrounded by brick walls. Third floor probably had a halfway decent view of the streetscape below.

I don’t know if the third floor was ever used for dining or just the nightclub use on the weekends.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top